Inthe Bible we are
told, that, at the final judgment, all men will be made the subjects of an
equitable moral reckoning. But we know, from the history of our species,
that there have been, and that there still are in the world, thousands who
have never had access to that revelation from Heaven with which we have
been favoured. It becomes then an interesting inquiry, how far the natural
light of reason can render men the fit subjects of a moral reckoning; and
how, in such a condition there can be any distinction between the godly
and the ungodly. In that record, which hath come from Heaven, it is said,
in reference to such individuals, that "God hath showed unto them that
which may be known of himself, because the invisible things of him from
the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the
things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead: so that they are
without excuse." In other words, it is affirmed that those who have never
had access to any direct communication from Heaven, are yet accountable
for their deeds, inasmuch as the existence and the character of God may be
gathered from the works which he has made. And it is thus that there may
be a distinction between those who have been led by these dim intimations
of his presence, to grope, though in the dark, after their Creator; and
those, who, notwithstanding these intimations, "have said in their heart,
that there is no God." When God looked down from heaven upon the children
of men, it was to see if there were any that did understand, — if there
were any that did seek after God.

The evidence for the
existence of a God is so manifest in all his works, that there have
scarcely been found any people, however ignorant and degraded, who have
not recognized, in the objects that are around them, the traces of a
designing and intelligent Creator. The marks of design are evident in the
combinations and processes of inanimate nature. We can see them in the
harmonious revolutions of those vast globes which compose the universe. We
can see them in the varied operation of those elements which are at work
upon the surface of our earth; in the regular succession of summer and
winter, spring-time and harvest. We behold them in the descending shower
which refreshes the soil, and in the ascending vapour which feeds the
mighty cisterns from whence that shower was poured. And still more
palpably do we recognize the traces of intelligence in the structure and
physiology of the vegetable kingdom. In those roots which fix the plant in
the soil, and collect for it its nutritive juices; in those tubes by which
these juices are conveyed through all its various branches; in those
leaves which cover and protect the infant bud, and die away again when the
seed is ripened; in those autumnal breezes which scatter the seeds on the
bosom of the earth, there to spring up in their turn, and to become
distinct members of the vegetable family—in all this varied conformation
of parts, and succession of agents, can we distinctly perceive the
adaptation of means to an end; an adaptation which must have been the
result of contemplation and design. But it is in animated nature that we
have the most striking proofs of the existence of an intelligent Creator.
In the structure of the bodies of animals the marks of design are so
manifold, that the simple enumeration of them would far exceed our limits.
In the structure of the eye alone, they are sufficiently numerous for our
purpose. It is arched over with an eye-brow to carry off from it the
moistures of the head. It is furnished with an eye-lid, which washes and
moistens it, which covers it in sleep, which protects it when awake,
spontaneously shutting on the approach of danger. Its optical adaptations
are still more striking. It has its levers, which shift backward and
forward, and which, without the will, or even the knowledge of him who
possesses it, suit themselves to the distance of the object on which he
gazes. In like manner, by the enlargement or contraction of its orifice,
does the eye adapt itself to the degree of light that is around it, by a
mechanism which baffles the imitation of human ingenuity, and even mocks
the scrutiny of anatomical investigation. Nor is the internal physiology
of animals less indicative of design than the external organization of
their bodies. We might enumerate, as examples, the preparation and
distribution of the various secretions, which either moisten the eye, or
which lubricate the joints; or which supply that stream of circulation
whose ebbings and flowings are the mystic indication of animal life; in
short, all the varied and multifarious processes which are going on in the
laboratory that is within us.

These are but a few of the
indications inscribed upon the face of nature, which point to nature’s
God. And it were indeed strange, if man, with all these evidences of
design, should never think of an intelligent Designer. Nor has it been so.
All have recognized these proofs of a Divinity. The most ignorant and
barbarous nations on the face of the earth, have imagined for themselves
(however degrading and incongruous their imaginations may have been), some
great and intelligent Being who made the heavens and the earth. It is not
among the rude and ignorant sons of barbarism, that we are to look for
those who have denied the existence of a God. Atheism is an unnatural
crime; and we must look for its manifestations chiefly among those who
have been bewildered by the speculations of an unnatural philosophy.

The natural attributes of
God seem to follow as corollaries to the demonstration of his existence.
Every one must admit, that, if there be a Being who made these heavens,
and this earth, and all that is in them, he must be a Being of infinite
might. We at once conclude, that He who gave the sea its bounds, that it
should not pass his decree, must be very powerful; that He who counts the
number of the stars, and guides them in their courses must be very great;
that He who binds them to their orbits by the simple law of gravitation,
must be very wise.

So far our way has been
smooth and even, and the steps of the demonstration have been of easy
ascent; but it is when we begin to consider the moral attributes of Deity,
that we feel our progress impeded by many obstructions. It is here that we
begin to perceive the insufficiency of the light of nature. It is when we
begin to look around amid the works of God for the proofs of his goodness
and his justice, that we feel ourselves bewildered and confounded. Yet
some proofs of these there must exist independent of that revelation which
God has made known to some of his creatures, or we cannot see how those
who have never heard of this revelation are at all accountable for their
actions. For aught that we have yet proved, He who formed with such
exquisite skill, and such infinite power, these heavens and this earth,
may after all care nothing for the beings he has made. He may sit in cold
abstraction upon the throne of his majesty, regardless of the intelligent
creatures he hath formed. He may have required nothing at their hand, and
in consequence it may not be their duty to render aught to him. Or, he who
reigns over the monarchy of the universe, may, notwithstanding his
greatness, and his power, and his wisdom, be a demon of malignant
influence; and however fearful our situation under such a conjecture, it
may be our duty to resist his every commandment. In order that all men may
be accountable before God, even natural religion must furnish some clue to
the ascertaining of these uncertainties. And we conceive that it does so,
though not in the way that has usually been represented.

It has been usual with the
expounders of natural theism to sum up all the misery that is to be found
in the world, and having placed it in counterpoise with the happiness
which we also find there, to pronounce the Deity benevolent or malignant
as the one scale or the other preponderates. They have represented to us
the many hours of health we enjoy for one hour of sickness; and the many
different circumstances that must meet ere we can enjoy one hour of ease.
And they have told of the happiness of the inferior animals, and have
instanced the countless shoals of happy ephemerae which dance with joy in
the meridian sunbeam. Now we can see that this is an argument for
comparative benevolence, but we cannot see it to be an argument for
perfect goodness. It proves that our Creator is not a devil, but it does
not prove him to be a God. It may be true that we enjoy hundreds of hours
of health for one hour of sickness; but why this one hour of sickness? Our
natural theist should remember too, that health is not all that is
necessary to constitute happiness. Why is it that not a day passes over
our head, but brings with it something to mar our enjoyment, some painful
affront, some boding fear, some disappointed hope? And when they point to
the happiness of the inferior creation, they would do well to remember the
ravages of death. Do they forget, that for those numberless myriads of
insects which sport so blithely in the noontide sun; myriads as numberless
have, since He made the circuit of the heavens, struggled in the throes of
dissolution? Why this mixture of misery with happiness, if God be
altogether benevolent?

These objections did not
fail to present themselves to the minds of our academic theists, and
accordingly they have made an attempt to meet them. They have feigned for
themselves some delightful region beyond the grave, where there will be
happiness without alloy, and where the miseries of life will be merged and
forgotten amid the joys of a blissful eternity. We say, "have feigned for
themselves;" for, on coming to examine their grounds of belief in the
existence of a future state, we find that the opinion has no foundation
but in the assumed goodness of the Deity, the very point they have
employed it to prove. But passing for the present this defect in their
reasoning, we cannot see how a futurity of happiness, though established
on the surest evidence, can at all make out their case. The question still
recurs, Why a state of mixed enjoyment at all? Why a single moment of
imperfect felicity under the government of a benevolent God? Would it be
deemed a sufficient excuse for the cruelty of an earthly parent to his
infant son, that when that son had grown to manhood, the father had done
all in his power to promote his happiness? And can it be thought a
sufficient vindication of the character of him who is called the Father of
our spirits, that although he hath made us miserable upon earth, he will
not make us miserable in heaven?

Notwithstanding this
anomaly in the moral government of God, and notwithstanding the weakness
of the reasoning on which the argument for his goodness has been founded,
there is a strong intuitive belief in the minds of his intelligent
creatures, that God is good and that the Judge of all the earth will do
rightly. So strong is this inherent faith in the divine goodness, and so
abhorrent to the mind of man is the thought of a malignant God, that
rather than accede to the monstrous proposition that the Divinity is
wicked, men have chosen to struggle against the most palpable
demonstrations of their senses, and have acceded to the equally monstrous
proposition that there is no Divinity at all.

Whence springs this
deep-rooted and almost universal belief in divine benevolence and justice?
We conceive it to be the result of that constitution of our nature by
which conscience has the supremacy in the kingdom that is within us. It
seems a just conclusion, that had he been a spirit of demoniac malignity,
or of aught but perfect righteousness, who built our frame, he never would
have placed within us a monitor to reproach us for our vice, and to
whisper approbation to our deeds of virtue.

This seems the only
satisfactory evidence, independent of revelation, for the moral
perfections of the Deity. It does not resolve the anomaly of his moral
government, but it may lead to the resolution of it. It does not satisfy,
but it may stimulate to inquiry. And who can fix the limit which must
bound the discoveries of the pious inquirer on this subject, who has
nought but the glimmering of nature’s light to guide his footsteps? Even
he may come to perceive that there is an indissoluble union between vice
and wretchedness, and that the misery which exists in our world is
casually connected with the moral evil which is also found there.

But this same constitution
of our nature, which proves the moral attributes of God, tells us also of
our connection with him, by revealing to us what he hath required of us.
And thus it is that all men become, to a certain degree, acquainted with
the law of God, and are consequently the fit subjects of a moral
reckoning. It is thus that "the Gentiles not having the (revealed) law,
are a law unto themselves: who show the work of the law written in their
hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean
while accusing, or excusing one another?" If a man thus perceive the moral
perfections of God, and if he compare his own doings with the requirements
of his conscience, he must find that he has come short of the law of God;
and he will wistfully look for a way of reconciliation.

This is the state in which
natural religion leaves its votaries; but, unfortunately, it is not the
state in which academic theists have usually left their disciples. They
have been desirous of solving those difficulties in which their science
places them, and they have done so by making a most degrading compromise
between the goodness and the justice of the Deity, by representing God to
be such a one as ourselves.

There are two grand
desiderata in which natural religion lands its disciples. The one is to
effect a reconciliation between the benevolence of the Deity, and the
misery that exists among his creatures. The other is to effect a
reconciliation between the mercy and the justice of God, in the pardon of
those who have transgressed his law. The solution of these two desiderata,
constitutes the grand design of that revelation which God hath given us.
And it is thus that the humble disciple of natural religion is in the best
state of preparation for the faith of the gospel. He is there told, that
the misery which exists in our world, is the fruit of moral evil: that "by
one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death hath
passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." There, too, he is told of
a Mediator, who hath suffered in the room of the guilty, and he can thus
perceive how God is just, yet not at the expense of his goodness;
merciful, yet not by a degrading compromise of his justice.

This revelation has made
manifest all that relates to ourselves, but it has not made manifest all
that relates to God. With regard to the second desideratum, (the way of
our acceptance with God), it is clear and perspicuous: but with regard to
the first, (the reconciliation between the divine goodness and the misery
of his creatures), it has thrown a light across the darkness, but it has
not perfectly illumined it. It has shifted the difficulty, but it has not
entirely removed it. It tells us that misery is the result of moral evil;
but with regard to the origin of evil, it is altogether silent. It answers
the objection, "Why does he yet find fault, for who hath resisted his
will?" by reminding us of our ignorance, and our weakness; "Nay, but, O
man, who art thou that repliest against God?" The Bible was not intended
to present us with a full development of the divine character; but only to
make known to us so much of that character as affects our own acceptance
with the Deity. It was not meant to be a sun from whence might emanate a
full illumination to reveal every object around us, but it was given us as
a lamp to guide our own footsteps through the darkness of nature. The Day
Star, it is true, hath arisen upon us, and "our path is as the shining
light, which shineth more and more unto the perfect day;" but the day
itself hath not yet dawned. Here we see as through a glass, darkly, and
know but in part: but we look forward to a period of clearer revelation,
when there shall beam forth upon us a brighter display of the Divine
attributes in all their harmony. And then shall we see "face to face, and
know even as we are known."

I shall be excused from
giving my opinion of this production, when I quote the following sentence
annexed to it, in the handwriting of Dr. Chalmers:—"An Essay of surpassing
worth, as have been all the other compositions of its author in the Moral
Philosophy Class."

This comment system requires
you to be logged in through either a Disqus account or an
account you already have with Google, Twitter, Facebook or
Yahoo. In the event you don't have an account with any of these
companies then you can create an account with Disqus. All
comments are moderated so they won't display until the moderator
has approved your comment.